schu

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/073/..._manifeP.shtml


Isn't Mitchell just following in the footsteps of the Patriarchs of the OT. If Jesus said that he had not come to overturn the laws, but to fulfil them it seems Mitchell is a man of god. He seems to have done just what the Patriarchs were doing. Why do people seem to have this problem with following the good book?

Not only that, he is also in line with the teachings of Joseph Smith and his henchman Brigham Young. He was just trying to get all the young snatch his religion would justify. If religion is about rationalizing, why draw the line with polygamy?

Amos

I see a great similarity between Mitchell and Bush in that both are motivated by the effect religion has upon their lives. In this sense both of them are responding to their inner convicton and are therefore "determined" to push their agenda at all cost and without much regard for future consequences. In other words, they are no longer rational agents but slaves to their own religious conversion.

The only difference I see is that Michell is the "blessed prophet" (poor guy) and Bush the courageous warrior (poor guy) who is set to prepare the way for the Lord to come and dwell amongst his flock. According to his interpretation of the good book Israel is the place where this will happen and it is "not until Israel is a nation holy and pure" [as perceived in the eyes of religious fundamentalist] that this will happen.

Both are/were aware of the danger that looms ahead. The protective veil worn by the females is the equivalent of our "homeland security" program and neither would be needed if there was nothing to be afraid of.